1999 PLP 1845 (SCMR)
Rana MUMTAZ AHMED NOON — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED KHAN -Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1845 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ |
| Parties | Rana MUMTAZ AHMED NOON — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED KHAN -Respondent |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1845 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 1845 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 1845 (SCMR) (Rana MUMTAZ AHMED NOON — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD JAVED KHAN -Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Abdul Raheem, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, ,Kdv6cate_on-Re; cord for Petitioner.
- Ehsan Ullah Lilla, Advocate Supreme Court, Ehsan-ul-Haq Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 5th August, 1998
- 4. Mr. Rana Abdul Raheem, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing in support of this petition, has not at all disputed the fact that petitioner's application, seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him, did not c6fitain any specific plea or question of law or fact which required investigation. He did even so much as contest the findings of the learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court,, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur which are support ed by,' inter alia, this Court's judgment in case reported as Messrs National Security Insurance Company Limited and others v. Messrs Hoechet Pakistan Limited and others.(1992 SCMR 718). We are also of the view that in the absence of even an averment in the application of the petitioner before the Trial Court seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him under Order XXXVII (ibid), the order dated 6-6-1997 was rightly upheld by the High Court. The petitioner is himself to blame for the, situation in which he find himself in this lis.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 26-6-1997 passed by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur in Civil Revision No.229/97/BWP).
O. XXXVII, Rr. 2 & 3
Leave to appear and defend suit
Defendant who bad sought leave to appear and defend suit, had failed to disclose any plausible defence or even specific question of law or fact which required to be tried or investigated
Application to appear and defend suit, was rightly dismissed by Trial Court and High Court in circumstances. Messrs National Security Insurance Company Limited and others v Messrs Hoechet Pakistan Limited and others 1992 SCMR 718 ref.
Judgment & Decree
CH. MUHAMMAD ARIF, J.
Respondent- Muhammad Javed Khan filed suit under Order, XXXVII of the. Code of Civil Procedure against the petitioner-seeking recovery of a total sum of Rs. 13,94,500 on -the basis of the cheques issued by the petitioner./defendant in favour of the plaintiff/respondent. Petitioner made an application under rule 3, of Order XXXVII (ibid) to obtain leave to appear and defend the case on 7-3-1997. His averments were that he has been served that the suit is false, without any basis and against facts, that he intends to produce evidence in support of his contention and defence in the exercise of his legal right and that, otherwise, he shall suffer irreparable loss. In reply to petitioner's application the other side resisted the same on the ground that the basis of the suit being the cheques issued by the defendant which were dishonoured, the application : of the petitioner is sans reference to any plausible defence whatsoever, therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed.
2. The learned District Judge, Bahawalpur, declined petitioner's request vide his order dated 6-6-1997,holding that the same ".. does not disclose any plausible defence, or even specific question of law, or fact which requires to be tried or investigated. The affidavit on the point is also silent .......
3. Petitioner-Rana Mumtaz Ahmed Noon, remaining unsuccessful before the Lahore high Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Babawalpur in his Civil Revision No.229 of 1997, against the order of the trial Court dated 6-6-1997, on 26~6~1997 ; has now filed this petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 for leave to appeal against judgment dated 26-6-1997. of the High Court.
4. Mr. Rana Abdul Raheem, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing in support of this petition, has not at all disputed the fact that petitioner's application, seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him, did not c6fitain any specific plea or question of law or fact which required investigation. He did even so much as contest the findings of the learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court,, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur which are support ed by,' inter alia, this Court's judgment in case reported as Messrs National Security Insurance Company Limited and others v. Messrs Hoechet Pakistan Limited and others.(1992 SCMR 718). We are also of the view that in the absence of even an averment in the application of the petitioner before the Trial Court seeking leave to appear and defend the suit against him under Order XXXVII (ibid), the order dated 6-6-1997 was rightly upheld by the High Court. The petitioner is himself to blame for the, situation in which he find himself in this lis.
5. Resultantly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. H.B.T./M-237/S ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed